Look, I have some idea of how the BLS works, and I have no idea how that's possible to find basically a month's worth of new unemployed people who were employed all along while losing 68000 government workers. They're government workers. You can actually count those pretty easy.

GAT_00:Look, I have some idea of how the BLS works, and I have no idea how that's possible to find basically a month's worth of new unemployed people who were employed all along while losing 68000 government workers. They're government workers. You can actually count those pretty easy.

Government workers includes all levels, not just the federal government.

meat0918:GAT_00: Look, I have some idea of how the BLS works, and I have no idea how that's possible to find basically a month's worth of new unemployed people who were employed all along while losing 68000 government workers. They're government workers. You can actually count those pretty easy.

Government workers includes all levels, not just the federal government.

Yeah, state and local are included.

I think it's less of a "data entry" problem, though, as opposed to a calculation change, as would be implied by the term "rebenchmarking".

After all, that magic number that makes it into the papers is anything but a tally-mark count.